The headline: growth is real, but the composition matters more
From January through February, Mexico’s total imports rose from US$100.4B to US$107.3B. On the surface, that looks like a solid start to the year.
But once the data are split by regime and origin, the picture becomes much sharper.
Three of the four main buckets declined:
In other words, all net import growth—and more—came from non-USMCA inputs imported under program-based manufacturing schemes.
That does not automatically mean Mexico is suddenly buying dramatically more extra-regional product in real terms. Because these are current-USD customs values, part of the increase may reflect higher international freight, insurance, and logistics costs embedded in the customs value of long-distance imports. But even with that caveat, the directional signal is clear: Mexico’s manufacturing platform became more exposed, in value terms, to non-USMCA supply chains.
The second signal: fewer importers, more value
There is another detail in the data that deserves attention.
The number of active importing companies fell from 38,232 to 35,900, even as total import value increased. That means average import value per active company moved higher.
The same pattern appears in the fastest-growing bucket. In IMMEX / Other, active companies declined from 4,423 to 3,901, while customs value jumped by more than US$8B.
That is usually what concentration looks like: fewer players moving more value.
For executives, that matters because it suggests early-2026 import growth was not broad-based. It was driven by a narrower set of larger or more freight-exposed manufacturing platforms.
Why this matters now: war disruption and USMCA review are colliding
This pattern would matter in any year. In 2026, it matters more.
The United States and Mexico formally launched the USMCA review process in March, and USTR has already said the discussions are focused on reducing dependence on imports from outside the region, tightening rules of origin, and limiting non-market inputs ahead of the July 1 joint review.
At the same time, Reuters reports that the Iran war has been pushing up factory input costs globally and disrupting supply chains through higher energy and logistics pressure. Reuters also notes that Mexican businesses broadly want to preserve the agreement because it underpins investment certainty, while warning that tighter regional-content discipline could be challenging for sectors that still depend on Asian components.
Put simply: the same supply chains that are becoming more expensive to run are also becoming more exposed to policy scrutiny.
What the data are really saying
Mexico remains one of the most strategic manufacturing platforms serving North America. But the operating model is changing. The early-2026 numbers suggest that Mexico’s import growth is currently leaning on extra-regional inputs under IMMEX structures, and part of that growth may be nominal rather than volumetric because of freight-loaded customs values.
That makes the strategic question more demanding than it was a few years ago. It is no longer enough to ask:
“Should we have a Mexico strategy?”
The better questions are:
How much of our Mexican platform depends on non-USMCA content?
How much of our cost base is exposed to freight and geopolitical volatility?
How resilient is our rules-of-origin position if enforcement tightens?
Which inputs, suppliers, and trade lanes are driving the exposure?
For many companies, the issue is no longer nearshoring versus not nearshoring. It is regional resilience versus freight-loaded dependency
Closing view
The early-2026 import data do not undermine the Mexico story. They refine it.
Mexico is still attracting manufacturing activity, still operating as a critical production hub, and still sitting at the center of North American supply chains. But current import composition suggests that part of this growth is being sustained by non-USMCA sourcing with rising landed-cost risk.
That is precisely why detailed supply-chain visibility matters.
If you are evaluating a sector, supplier base, or manufacturing footprint in Mexico, the next step is to go beyond the headline totals and identify the actual structure underneath: which HS families are growing, which origin countries are gaining share, which regimes are carrying the expansion, which gateways are being used, and where concentration risk is accumulating.
If that would be useful, request a deeper cut on your specific supply chain. We can break the story down by industry, product group, origin mix, customs regime, gateway, supplier ecosystem, and concentration profile—so you can see whether the opportunity in Mexico is becoming more regional, more exposed, or both.
